Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I want to ask the question of whether it is right or necessary to kill an willing innocent victim for the crimes of the rest of us.
To me this sounds wrong because when someone does wrong to others, they deserve punishment. You don't punish someone else for their crimes because that is not what that innocent person deserves. Letting a person who deserves punishment not have that punishment is wrong. It does not matter that an innocent person wants to be punished for the crimes of the guilty, the guilty deserve punishment and the innocent does not, so the guilty should be punished.
If you think of punishment as making the guilty give back what they took, or compensating the victim and the victim's family, making sure that further crime doesn't happen again, and that further crime is discouraged, scapegoating still doesn't make sense.
Punishing an innocent person for the crimes of the guilty does not give back to the victims of the crime. It certainly does not discourage crime very much and certainly discourages crime far less than punishing the guilty because the guilty are punished less than they should.
It does not keep the guilty person from committing the crime as much. All we can do is hope that the guilty person feels bad about what he has done when he is released. In fact any benefits scapegoating has can also be received by just being merciful to the guilty person and not even punishing the innocent person.
What if a criminal was brought in for murder and was about to receive the death penalty when his mother volunteered to take his place. Would you kill the mother and let the criminal go? Use some common sense.
I will ignore responses that do not try to show why their position is true through reason.
I want to ask the question of whether it is right or necessary to kill an willing innocent victim for the crimes of the rest of us.
To me this sounds wrong because when someone does wrong to others, they deserve punishment. You don't punish someone else for their crimes because that is not what that innocent person deserves. Letting a person who deserves punishment not have that punishment is wrong. It does not matter that an innocent person wants to be punished for the crimes of the guilty, the guilty deserve punishment and the innocent does not, so the guilty should be punished.
If you think of punishment as making the guilty give back what they took, or compensating the victim and the victim's family, making sure that further crime doesn't happen again, and that further crime is discouraged, scapegoating still doesn't make sense.
Punishing an innocent person for the crimes of the guilty does not give back to the victims of the crime. It certainly does not discourage crime very much and certainly discourages crime far less than punishing the guilty because the guilty are punished less than they should.
It does not keep the guilty person from committing the crime as much. All we can do is hope that the guilty person feels bad about what he has done when he is released. In fact any benefits scapegoating has can also be received by just being merciful to the guilty person and not even punishing the innocent person.
What if a criminal was brought in for murder and was about to receive the death penalty when his mother volunteered to take his place. Would you kill the mother and let the criminal go? Use some common sense.
I will ignore responses that do not try to show why their position is true through reason.
We are like a two year old compared to the wisdom of the Big JC, he died for us just like we would sacrifice our lives for our children.
Since his death has not saved anyone from anything I would have to logically arrive at the conclusion that his death was pointless. (mind you I do not think Jesus existed the way the Bible depicts)
Last edited by mikebnllnb; 03-03-2012 at 09:35 PM..
God(swt) has no needs. He has no need of sacrifices. There is no need for him to have a sacrifice to allow him to forgive man's sins. He need only think it and it is done.
It is only the arrogance of men to think they are so great that God will sacrifice himself to save them.
According to the myth, he really did not die nor did he suffer that much. My mother had a more painful cancer death that spanned a gruesome last 3 weeks of her life requiring huge amounts of morphine for the pain.
Jesus got beat up some, nailed to a cross, stabbed in the side with a spear to bleed to death so no, not much of a painful death.
Then he is buried in a rich man's tomb, embalmed with spices and gets a hey ho wake up call less than 3 days later. My mother is still dead.
It is very odd that folk see that a temporary death appeases the "wrath of godâ„¢" when the scriptures clearly show us even the barbaric animal sacrifices were nothing more than pagan offshoots adopted by the Jews and not required, this from their beloved mythical king David. Most folk will not see this or not aware or simply interpret it to mean there was a "better sacrificeâ„¢" to come.
If the sins of man were nullified by his sacrifice then it should be as he allegedly claimed "finished". Yet the system of christianity still requires you to suck up to god and pay homage and behave yourself and not sin and and and and and....
So yes, the sacrifice (if it ever happened) was a waste of time as mankind still has not changed at the base level. Now the system requires you to "accept" this alleged "sacrifice" as atonement for the sins you are guilty of (according to Jewish scriptures) before you even make one single mistake.
The big sin is that you were born with a penis or a vagina and the natural instinct to want to join these two (necessary for reproduction) is painted with all sorts of sinful connotations and a host of additional archaic laws required before these fun parts may meet. So much so that dress codes are invented to ensure the minimum arousal esp. by the males.
Of course no one can explain really why so called born again xians still get pregnant out of wedlock - oh I forgot, they invented another dude to take the blame for this; then tend to have higher divorce rates than the non believers.
Once you have removed all the pomp and ceremony and spiritual artefacts, jesus ess. died b/c god made man to be sexually driven.
It starts with shame about your bodies and permeates the entire bible. Repressed sexuality will make folk do strange things.
Thanks to science, we now can explore and enjoy this aspect of our being w/o making too many babies and can elect when we want to actually have them. That just will not do. How dare we enjoy life.
As it turns out, the females are "programmed" to seek out a mate that will help care for any offspring that may result from copulation.
But somewhere in all of this, there is that aspect of falling in love. When this is allowed to happen naturally w/o shackles of religion and laws, usually these unions last a lifetime. We are not the only species that mate for life. We are not that special.
Sorry for the log post but this is how I see christianity and the whole control mechanism associated with it. All the other stuff we are not supposed to do like steal, murder, etc. are covered by secular laws with appropriate consequences for breaking those laws.
The last bastion of the religious is to force their sick and unnatural sex laws upon society.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
